Léargas

Thursday, May 23, 2019

Seamus Mallon was never a big fan of
the Hume-Adams talks. In 1985 Fr. Alex Reid – the Sagart - tried on at least
three occasions to organise a meeting between me and Mr Mallon. He delayed and
delayed. Despite further efforts by Fr. Reid after the Anglo-Irish Agreement
was signed in November 1985, Mr. Mallon finally said no to a meeting in March
1986.

On May 19th 1986 Fr. Alec wrote to
John Hume. John phoned Clonard Monastery the next day and the following day he
met the Sagart. John and I met shortly afterwards. The Hume Adams initiative
was a product of those talks. While there were other element and many more
contributors the Peace Process grew out of them. So did the Good Friday
Agreement.

Mise agus Albert Reynolds and John at Government Buildings, Dublin

In my opinion Seamus Mallon is not a
big fan of the Good Friday Agreement. He wrongly blames it and the two
governments on the decline of the SDLP and ignores other factors including his
own role in this development. So his recent claim that a “united Ireland by numbers won’t work” comes as no surprise. It
ignores the clear provisions of the Good Friday Agreement and undermines the
equal and democratic value which should be given to every vote. Mr. Mallon’s
proposition also seeks to rewrite the principle of consent contained within the
Good Friday Agreement.

His latest position gives an
unintended insight into his role in the negotiations which led to the Good
Friday Agreement. John Hume had a much more progressive and realistic position
which did not accept an internal - that is a six county- settlement. That is
one of the issues which we agreed on early in our talks in 1986. It was also an
important element in talks between the SDLP and Sinn Féin in 1988 and in the
first Hume Adams statement in April 1993. It is a central part of the Good
Friday Agreement:.

Mr. Mallon is now proposing that the
constitutional and political landscape should be rewritten to provide unionism
with an entrenched veto over the issue of rights, and in particular the right
to self-determination and independence subverted by partition almost 100 years
ago.

He does acknowledge the failure of
partition when the rights of nationalists and republicans were trampled on. How
could he do otherwise? But he repeats that mistake by raising the democratic
bar on unity in favour of unionism. He hasn’t moved beyond the deeply flawed
Sunningdale Agreement.

In short Mr. Mallon is saying that a
unionist majority can maintain partition, and the Union with Britain, but a
majority which favours a United Ireland cannot achieve this without the
agreement of a majority of Unionists.

As well as being at odds with the Good
Friday Agreement, this stance is also in stark contrast to other majority
decisions of significance taken in recent years. That is how EU treaties were
decided in the South. Two recent referendums there on marriage equality and a
woman’s reproductive rights were determined by a majority. The right of
nationalists in the north to vote in an election for the Presidency of Ireland
will be determined by a majority referendum vote later this year. If Scotland
holds a referendum on the Union it too will be determined by a majority. If
majorities are acceptable in those circumstances, why should a vote on Irish
Unity be any different?

Seamus Mallon’s proposal would also
make the task of progressing a rights based agenda in the North even more
difficult than it already is. Where is the sense of “belonging” in his “shared
home place” if the first thing he argues for is the relegation of the
rights of Irish language speakers and our LGBTQ+ citizens in the current
negotiations? How can “safety, security
and comfort” be achieved if not through the core principles of the Good
Friday Agreement – equality and parity of esteem?

And in case Mr. Mallon has forgotten,
the collapse of the Assembly and Executive in 2017, and of the talks last year,
was about more than language and marriage equality rights and the crass bigotry
of some in the DUP. The British government and the DUP also refused to honour
agreements, particularly around the issue of legacy. And then there was the
scandal of the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI). Hundreds of millions of pounds
of public money squandered amid allegations of misconduct and corruption of DUP
officials.

As the political momentum and demand
for unity is growing as a result of demographic and political changes, greater
public politicisation, and the Brexit debacle, Mr. Mallon chooses this time to
propose changing the Good Friday Agreement. He must know such a change will not
be agreed.

He wants nationalists and republicans
to “stop pushing for unity”. We
should set aside our legitimate desire for unity until “there is a wider and deeper acceptance of it among the unionist
community.” How will we achieve that acceptance if we don’t encourage a
conversation about the benefits of unity?

Political change, and especially
around such a vexed issue as partition, is only possible if the arguments for
and against are debated publicly. We need a public discourse in which all of
the claims and counterclaims; pros and cons can be discussed.

Mr. Mallon’s proposition also misses
the main achievement of the Good Friday Agreement. That Agreement is not a
constitutional settlement. It never claimed to be one. By making consent a
requirement for both the Union and Irish Unity it removes the constitutional
veto once enjoyed by unionism. The Good Friday Agreement was and is an
agreement based on equality and parity of esteem.

Negotiating in the Cabinet Room, Downing Street in 2004

Of course every sensible United
Irelander wants the biggest majority possible for unity. That is the most
desirable outcome of a referendum on unity. By dint of their numbers unionists
have a very strong position. We cannot be blind to that. Persuading enough of
them to take control of their own affairs in a new agreed Ireland is a
historical challenge. Being aware, sensitive and committed to winning as many
unionists as possible to an agreed future in a new Ireland, and being generous
and imaginative about this is the only way forward.

But it does not include inventing a
new veto. Where in the tortured history of the northern state is there evidence
to support the view that nationalists acquiescing to unionism ever worked? On
the contrary – from the civil rights movement through the peace process, and
the many periods of negotiations - progress has only been achieved when
nationalists and republicans stood up for and asserted our rights alongside the
rights of everyone else. Its equality Stupid!

The thrust of Mr. Mallon’s argument is
that a United Ireland born out of a unity referendum, with a narrow majority,
risks a rerun of the past with the boot placed on the other foot. That
nationalists and republicans would do to unionism what was done to us for
generations. His argument is spurious and offensive. I know of no republican or
nationalist who believes for one instance that we are so stupid, so narrow
minded, so bigoted, so driven by hatred, as to do that. Nor do I believe that
there is any popular support for a return to the conflict of the past. The last
two decades have seen positive societal change. Citizens want that progress to continue.

Seamus Mallon’s willingness to change
the Good Friday Agreement and reintroduce the unionist veto threatens that
progress and ignores the lessons and failures of partition.

Finally, United Irelanders should
continue to raise that objective wherever and whenever we can. In recent years
there has been significant progress. Irish Unity is now firmly fixed on the
political agenda. We will not take it off that agenda nor will we acquiesce to
a new unionist veto. My preference is for a unitary state but as republicans
have said many times we are open to agreeing transitional arrangements. In
fact, transitional arrangements are a necessary part of our journey as an
island people. As republicans we are working for a shared space - a new
harmonious dispensation- in which sectarianism is a thing of the past and where
people of every political persuasion and none can live, work and socialise
together on the basis of equality. That’s the way forward.

Friday, May 17, 2019

Over the decades many official and unofficial reports, pamphlets and
books have been published examining the evidence for British state collusion
with unionist paramilitaries in the murder of citizens. These include, reports
by Amnesty International, the Barron report into the Dublin Monaghan bombings,
reports by the North’s Police Ombudsman, the Pat Finucane Centre, by Canadian
Judge Peter Cory; the de Silva report; and books like Ian Cobain’s ‘The History
Thieves’; Unfinished
Business: State Killings and the Quest for Truth by Bill Rolston: A Very
British Jihad by Paul Larkin: and Lethal Allies by Anne Cadallader. Among many
others.

Last week Mark McGovern’s ‘Counterinsurgency and Collusion in Northern
Ireland.’ was published. It significantly adds to the body of evidence
already available about Britain’s dirty war in Ireland and its use of unionist death
squads and shoot-to-kill actions.

McGovern’s book is hugely detailed and
provides countless sources for the evidence it produces and the conclusions it
draws.It acknowledges that there is not
a “single cause of such institutional
collusion” but rather a “confluence
of forces.” The book examines the historical and political context for
collusion, including partition and the creation of the Orange State; “The long-term sectarianised character of
state and society in Northern Ireland undoubtedly played an important role.”

Geraldine Finucane speaking at Relatives for Justice Launch of book in St. Mary's

“Counterinsurgency and Collusion in Northern Ireland” details the various phases of organisation, structure and tactics that Britain’s
counterinsurgency strategy and use of collusion went through from the early 70s
until the late 1990s. It examines Britain’s “intelligence-led
attritional strategy that generated a grey zone of official deniability around
the criminal actions of state agents and informers designed to defeat an
intractable enemy.”

The book looks at the history of Britain’s
imperial use of counter-insurgency as it sought to dominate its colonial
possessions and the role of three former British Army officers who promoted the
use of “irregular warfare”; Charles E. Callwell, Charles Gwynn and Frank
Kitson. Callwell is especially
interesting. He was an “Irish Unionist”
who in 1896 wrote ‘Small Wars: Their
principles and Practice’. The British Army’s current Counterinsurgency
field manual acknowledges that this was the start of the formal use of
counter-insurgency strategy by Britain.

For Callwell counterinsurgency was the
strategic use of violence against “lesser
races” and “savage enemies” and
those insurgents who “dog the footsteps
of the pioneers of civilization.” As McGovern states: “Callwell was a stout advocate of a strategy of ‘butcher and bolt’;
raids undertaken to destroy crops, livestock and buildings, to raze whole
villages to the ground and lay waste to conquered areas that ‘fanatics and savages [could be] thoroughly
brought to book and cowed … [so that they would not] rise up again.”

McGovern also looks at how collusion, and the
sharply dividing opinions of how it was used in the North, impacts today on the
“often political divisive debates about
how to deal with the legacy of the past and outstanding issues of truth and
justice left in its wake.”

Fr. Raymond Murray speaking at launch in Dungannon of Counterinsurgency and Collusion

While the primary geographical focus of this
book is East Tyrone and South Derry – Mid Ulster – the book also looks at the
role of the Military Reaction Force (MRF) in sectarian killings in Belfast; the
emergence of the Force Reconnaissance Unit (FRU) which ran Brian Nelson and
other agents, and was responsible for the murder of Pat Finucane; and the
import of weapons from South Africa in 1987 – with the knowledge of British
intelligence. It is worth remembering that the human cost of this
weapons shipment can be found in the numbers killed in sectarian attacks. In
the three years prior to receiving this weapons shipment unionist death squads
had killed 34 people. In the three years after the shipment they killed 224 and
wounded countless scores more.

Ulster Resistance, which was founded by the
DUP in 1986 played “the most critical
part in the operation” to bring the weapons into the North.

Looking at Mid Ulster McGovern states: “Between 1988 and August 1994 86 people were
killed in East Tyrone … many with guns imported as part of the 1987 arms
shipment.” Many of these were IRA Volunteers, Sinn Féin activists or their
family members.

All of this has to be seen in the context of
the objective of the British state and the British Army, especially during the
Thatcher years. In its report on Operation Banner, the name given to the 30
years of Britain’s War in Ireland, it states: “The British government’s main military objective in the 1980s was the
destruction of PIRA, rather than resolving the conflict.”

Collusion involving unionist paramilitaries
was also interconnected to shoot-to-kill operations by British forces. McGovern
states: “…collusion should not be seen in
isolation but rather viewed in relation to broader state counterinsurgency – particularly
evidence of a shoot-to-kill policy, conducted primarily by specialist units of
the RUC and British Army, directed against republicans”.

In East Tyrone between 1983 and 1992 26 IRA
volunteers were assassinated, including at eight at Loughgall, along with one
civilian. McGovern reviews many of these events in detail. He also examines the
circumstances surrounding the killings of Gerard Casey; Liam Ryan and Michael
Ryan in the Battery Bar, Ardboe; Malcolm Nugent, Dwayne O’Donell, John Quinn
and Tomas Armstrong in Cappagh; Sinn Féin Councillors John Davey and Bernard
O’Hagan; Kathleen O’Hagan, Tommy Casey and Patrick Shanaghan and sadly many
more. McGovern’s book begins and ends its examination of individual cases with
the murder of Roseann Mallon exactly 25 years ago on 8 May 1994.

Professor Mark McGovern at Dungannon launch

At the time of the attack on her home it was
under constant surveillance by British Army covert units, who were in “constant, direct contact with an officer at
their base who was overseeing matters”. There were also cameras relaying
images to a nearby base “home to British
Army specialist units such as the Special Air Service (SAS).” At the
inquest it was revealed that evidence “had
not been provided, disappeared, been lost, tampered with or destroyed by the
policy – including suspect interview notes, police officers’ notebooks, and
last but by no means least, the wiped video footage taken from the covert
British post on the day of the killing… Getting
to the truth was also hindered by the refusal of some former policemen,
servants of the law to co-operate with the court and the lengthy, drawn out
battles to overcome official barriers put in the way of disclosure.”

In his conclusion McGovern addresses the
claim of a witch-hunt by former British military personnel and the unionist and
Tory parties and media. He concludes that “the
record rather suggests a long-term de facto immunity and a priori amnesty for
military wrongdoing”. He notes that “only
four British soldiers were convicted for murder in the North of Ireland … in
each case the soldier in question served less than three years in jail before
being released and returned to the ranks of the British Army.”

“Counterinsurgency and Collusion in Northern Ireland” adds significantly to our knowledge of how this British military and
political policy worked. It provides much new sourced detail. It also gives an
important insight into why successive British governments have constantly blocked
progress on legacy issues.

Thursday, May 9, 2019

I have watched with awe and huge admiration the
courage and steadfastness of the families of those killed in Ballymurphy in
August 1971 throughout their long campaign to get to the truth of what happened
on our streets 48 years ago. The current inquest has been a difficult
experience for them. They have had to listen to the lies and spin from former
British soldiers seeking to justify their killing of Fr. Hugh Mullan,
Francis Quinn, Daniel Teggart, Joan Connolly – a mother of eight - Joseph
Murphy, Noel Phillips, Edward Doherty, John Laverty, Joseph Corr and John
McKerr. An 11th man, local community worker Paddy McCarthy, died from a heart
attack after a British army patrol subjected him to a mock execution. Eleven
families lost loved ones and 57 children were bereaved.

The year before internment Sinn Féin organised a
petition in Ballymurphy for British soldiers to leave the area. About 97% of
the community voted ‘Yes’. Ballymurphy was not what one would call a Republican
community at that time. Through 1970 and in the months leading up to August
1971 the British Army pumped countless gallons of CS Gas into the area . They
used rubber bullets and generally intimidated everyone, including women and
children. A range of community organisations came together to resist them.
These included the Hen Patrols, Citizens Defence and so forth. There were acts
of resistance every day. It was communal activity. Ballymurphy never went to
war. Rather the war came to Ballymurphy.

Some time ago I was asked by the Coroners Service
to make a statement about my knowledge of those events. I gave them a statement
in January and subsequently agreed a longer, more formal statement. Three weeks
ago I received a letter from the Coroners Service formally asking me to attend
the Ballymurphy Inquest on Wednesday to give evidence as a witness. Below is
the statement which I prepared.

My Statement to the Coroner’s Service:

“My name is Gerry Adams. I was formerly the MP and
MLA for west Belfast. And since 2011 I have been a Teachta Dála (TD) for the
constituency of Louth.

During the interment swoops of August 9th 1971
my family home was 11 Divismore Park, Ballymurphy. My family had lived there
since the house was built in the1950s. Divismore Park is directly opposite the
Henry Taggart Church Hall on the Springfield Road. At the time of internment,
and for some time before this, the Taggart was occupied by the British Army.
They were also on the roof of the Vere Foster School behind the Henry Taggart.

I am a republican. My family, maternally and paternally,
have been involved in republicanism since before partition. I became active in
republican politics in my mid-teens in the mid-1960s. I joined Sinn Féin, which
was then an illegal organisation under the Special Powers Act.

I was active locally in west Belfast in campaigns
for decent housing and in civil rights agitation and in Ballymurphy in
community politics. I was a founder member of the west Belfast Housing Action
Committee and a founding member of the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association.
Later I was elected to the local Belfast committee.

After the Belfast pogroms in August 1969 I left
paid employment to become a full-time Sinn Féin activist. Along with many
others I was involved in providing assistance to thousands of refugees who
flooded into west Belfast. I also worked with the Central Citizens Defence
Committee which co-ordinated the community response to the refugee crisis.

At that time parts of Belfast were barricaded by
local residents. The RUC and British soldiers were excluded by local
nationalist and republican communities.

I worked with a range of community organisations
which sprang up around that time. They basically organised their
neighbourhoods. This was the time of very widespread civil disobedience and the
withdrawal of nationalists from the structures of the state.

In Ballymurphy and the Upper Springfield there was
a quite a sophisticated and very democratic community structure involving the
Ballymurphy Tenants Association, other community organisations, Sinn Féin.
Street Committees and Youth Committees, a Citizen’s Defence Committee, Ex
British Servicemen’s Association, and Women’s Groups, including Hen Patrols.
There were also two IRA groups, popularly known as the Officials and the
Provisionals.

The British Army’s attitude to the local community
was very brutal, and from 1970, within a short time of them arriving on the
streets, there was regular and sustained street fighting. This was mainly local
people resisting a very aggressive occupation.

Ballymurphy in particular was often saturated with
British patrols; riot squads were deployed daily; and CS gas and rubber bullets
were used in huge numbers. At the time of internment, I was the Chairperson of
the local Sinn Féin Cumann or branch in the Upper Springfield, including
Ballymurphy.

The politics of the area had changed immensely
since August 1969. By the time of internment in 1971 the people of Ballymurphy
were a risen people, a community united in opposition to the injustices imposed
upon them. Most of the street fighting which had taken place in 1970 and early
1971 did not involve the use of firearms. It was normally bricks, bottles,
stones, petrol bombs and occasionally blast bombs.

11 people died in the Upper Springfield as a result
of the conflict in the three days following internment. I did not witness any
of these killings. I believe all those who died were killed by the British
Army. My account of these events in one of my books, Before the Dawn, is drawn
from conversations with people at the time or shortly afterwards, or as a
result of research I undertook, including contemporary media reports, when
writing Before the Dawn in 1995.

Internment was introduced shortly before 4 am on
the morning of Monday August 9th 1971. I was not at home. I was
in a friend’s house in Springhill which is an adjoining housing estate. My
family home was raided. My father and my brother Liam, who was 14, were
arrested.

The Parachute Regiment evicted my mother and the
rest of the family and occupied the house. They wrecked it so much that my
mother was never able to return. The house was subsequently demolished.

The British Army withdrew to the outskirts of the
area after the initial raid and arrest operation. A number of local community
leaders were among those arrested and badly beaten and local people congregated
at the Henry Taggart in protest.

The British Army deployed riot squads, a water
cannon and fired rubber bullets and CS gas. Around mid-afternoon on the 9th August
homes in Springfield Park were attacked by loyalists from Springmartin. There
was shooting by the British Army and possibly also by loyalists from
Springmartin.

That fire was returned by a small number of IRA
volunteers from Moyard. They then withdrew. The rioting continued sporadically
all the rest of that afternoon and evening as some families were evicted from
Springfield Park by Loyalists.

That night around 9pm a number of people were
killed and injured on waste ground between Moyard and Springfield Park by the
British Army firing from Springmartin. At the same time other British soldiers
had opened fire from the Henry Taggart into Ballymurphy.

A number of people were killed opposite the Henry
Taggart in a field between Ballymurphy and Springhill. There was no IRA firing
at that time. I was in Springhill. The firing from the Henry Taggart was very
intense although we were sheltered from this.

I witnessed a young boy, Eddie Butler, who had been
wounded being rescued by local people. During a lull in the British Army firing
from the Taggart he and some other boys were encouraged to crawl from the
undergrowth where they were trapped, through wire and a hedge into Springhill.

The wounded boy was put on a door, which someone
produced, and he was taken in a house where first aid was administered by the
Knights of Malta before he was taken away by ambulance.

During this rescue I saw two masked IRA Volunteers
go toward the top of Springhill Avenue. I then heard firing from that area. I
was later told that they had fired toward British troops who were across the
Springfield Road on the high ground at Springmartin or in or around Glenravel
School. It was not possible to fire at the Henry Taggart from the top of
Springhill Avenue”.

Thursday, May 2, 2019

In February 2018, Sinn
Féin and the DUP negotiating teams and leaders closed on a draft agreement to
be considered by our leaderships. The DUP leader Arlene Foster failed to get
the support of her Officer Board. The talks collapsed in recriminations. At that
time I wrote: “It is not the end. The shutter has been pulled down on
this phase of talks but ultimately all of the parties, Sinn Féin, Alliance,
SDLP and the UUP and DUP, along with the two governments, will at some point in
the time ahead be back around the same table, negotiating.” And that’s
where the parties and two governments will be when a new round of talks
commence next week.

The murder of Lyra
McKee, and public revulsion at the actions of those responsible, has been the
main catalyst for this at this time. The British Government seized the moment
and announced a ‘new’ talks process. The Irish Government has bought into this.
The shock, outrage and sadness at Lyra’s death has highlighted the widespread
desire for progress. People want solutions to the political impasse at
Stormont. They want local politicians taking responsibility for those issues
that are impacting on citizens, in health and education and the environment and
much more. They want to hold these politicians accountable for their decisions.
But those who support Sinn Féin and wider opinion do not want a return to the
status quo. They want the power sharing government to be rights based. That
means as a first step there needs to be commitments that rights currently being
denied will be delivered.

As two decades of
negotiations through the peace process have shown, finding solutions to long
standing issues of dispute is not easy. It is often hugely time consuming. But
it has been done. Positive change – significant progress - can be achieved when
the political will is created.

The Good Friday
Agreement is perhaps the best example of this. But as George Mitchell pointed
out at the time – that was the easy bit – implementing the agreement would be
much more challenging. He was right. Remember, the DUP absented itself from
those talks. Some UUP representatives, now prominent in the DUP, walked out. It
took almost a decade for Sinn Féin to agree a power sharing government with the
DUP.

Sinn Féin has
consistently worked in good faith within the power sharing government.
Our objective was and is to deliver for citizens. A lot of good work was
done by the Executive and the Assembly and significant progress was made on
many issues, including on cross border and all-Ireland matters. However, the
DUP consistently tried to hollow out the Agreement. They removed Ian Paisley as
leader because he was perceived by some to be too friendly with Martin
McGuinness. The Church which he founded got rid of him.

Martin and Peter
Robinson, who took over from Ian Paisley, had a decent working relationship.
But it was a battle a day. For Peter I am sure, as well as Martin. There were
also very serious allegations - unproven so far - of wrong doing by
some senior DUP figures around NAMA and other important issues. All the
while the DUP approach was minimalist on equality issues. As a
consequence, there was little or no progress on important matters. For example,
21 years after the Good Friday Agreement, there is still no Bill of
Rights.

When Peter Robinson
retired, Arlene Foster’s use of offensive terms to describe Irish speakers and
others highlighted the DUP’s antipathy toward the equality and mutual
respect elements of the Good Friday Agreement and its disrespect for Irish
identity and culture. This was most clearly evident in its antagonism toward
the Irish Language. In a changing Ireland DUP opposition to marriage equality,
its resistance to positive efforts to support women’s’ health initiatives; its
refusal to honour commitments it gave on legacy matters made matters worse. And
then came the costly debacle of the Renewable Heat Initiative (RHI) scandal! A
perfect storm which increased the toxic atmosphere within the Executive and the
Assembly.

Much of this DUP
negativity is fed by the fear political unionism has for the democratic and
demographic changes that have been taking place over the last two decades.
According to the most recent census results those who identify as British now
make up less than half of the population of the North. In the 2017 Assembly
election, for the first time since partition, the UUP and DUP won less than
half of the Assembly seats. But change is also obvious in the nationalist
middle class. Civic republicanism has emerged as a real and growing grassroots
movement for rights and equality. Brexit - and the British Government and the
DUPs disregard for the referendum vote - has been an accelerant for this
movement.

So, let’s be clear about
some basics. The British government is not about to implement previous
Agreements it has failed to honour thus far. It is more concerned with process
at this time than product. The British Government has bigger fish to fry. The
Union to one side, Mrs May really doesn’t care about the North. In the midst of
the Brexit madness at Westminster she will not stand up to her DUP partners in
government and insist that those fundamental human rights available everywhere
else on these islands should also be available for citizens in the North. She
is badly served by Karen Bradley. The current British Secretary of State has
proven herself more incapable than any of her many mediocre predecessors. And
anyway now courtesy of Brexit many people in Ireland and abroad have seen close
up the arrogance, ignorance and downright stupidity and incompetence of British
parliamentarians. What right thinking person would want to be governed by
idiots like them? At least if we had self-government we could sack our own
idiots when we want to.

The murder of Lyra McKee
has not changed any of this. That is the sad reality. Of all the parties Sinn
Féin, rooted in republican communities, and at considerable risk to ourselves
and our families, has stood firmly against these anti peace armed gangs like
the one which killed Lyra. The political parties cannot be blamed for her death,
although those who have a dead hand on the process of change should reflect on
the need to make politics work. For everyone.

Labelling Lyra’s killers
as dissidents is lazy commentary. To dissent is an honourable position. These
groups, heavily infiltrated by the policing agencies, serve no purpose
whatsoever in the political struggle. Her death came during a US
Congressional Delegation visit to Ireland and Britain. Speaker Pelosi and
Congress leader Richie Neal were forthright and clear in their admonishments of
the Brexiteers and on their commitment to the Good Friday Agreement.

Lyra McKee was a victim
of stupidity and nihilism. It struck me as particularly poignant that she was
gunned down on the twenty first anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement. It is
also particularly sad that this thoroughly modern young woman and her fiancée
were denied the right to marriage equality by the DUP. Surely a fitting tribute
to her and her bright young life would be to have this right legalised as soon
as possible. No ifs or buts. Just like everywhere else on these islands.

Until the DUP accept or
acquiesce to this and other rights the power sharing government cannot function
properly. DUP leaders know this. They also know that there will be marriage
equality, an Irish Language Act and other rights. It is a matter of when, not
if. An Tánaiste, Simon Coveney, knows this also. So does the Taoiseach.

As always Sinn Féin will
do our best. I am sure our leaders will encourage the DUP to have these matters
resolved as soon as possible. The Irish Government needs to do likewise. The
Taoiseach is a co-equal guarantor of the Good Friday and other agreements. Let
us be positive. We will have our rights. We shall overcome.

Sunday, April 28, 2019

Many fine
words, songs and poems have been written about the Easter Rising of 1916. Some
were written by those who waited in the prisons to be executed. Others were
personal recollections of that period written by those outside of the prisons,
in the weeks, months and years after the Rising. They were moved by the courage
and tenacity of the 1916 Leaders and by the individual stories of bravery of
those who participated in that great event.

In
1966 the Merry Ploughboy by Dermot O’Brien was number 1 for six weeks in the Irish
charts. It was hugely popular and remains so today:

And
we're all off to Dublin in the green, in the greenWhere the helmets glisten in the sunWhere the bay'nets flash and the riffles crash

To the rattle of a Thompson gun.

Kevin
Barry has been a perennial favourite which has been recorded many times over
the years, including by Paul Robson and Leonard Cohen. The Clancy Brothers and
Tommy Makem sang Freedom’s Sons:

They were the men with a vision, the men with a causeThe men who defied their oppressor's lawsThe men who traded their chains for gunsBorn into slav'ry, they were Freedom's Sons

Rod
Stewart has recorded Grace which tells of the love and marriage of 1916 Joseph
Plunkett and Grace Gifford just hours before his execution:

Oh Grace just
hold me in your arms and let this moment linger
They'll take me out at dawn and I will die
With all my love I place this wedding ring upon your finger
There won't be time to share our love for we must say goodbye

And there are countless more songs and poems. Most of these songs were about men but many of today’s singers correct
that. There are very few songs in Irish about the Rising but Sean O’Riada’s
icon, classic music score for the film Mise Éire will still stir the heart and
the spirit.

These are some of my personal words
and poems and lyrics. Enjoy:

Address to Court Martial: Pádraic Mac Piarais:

“Believe that we, too, love freedom and desire it.
To us it is more desirable than anything in the world. If you strike us down
now, we shall rise again and renew the fight. You cannot conquer Ireland. You
cannot extinguish the Irish passion for freedom. If our deed has not been sufficient
to win freedom then our children will win it by a better deed.”

Connolly by
Liam MacGabhann

The
man was all shot through that came todayInto the barrack
square;A soldier I - I am not proud
to sayWe killed him there;They brought him from
the prison hospital;To see him in that
chairI thought his smile
would far more quickly callA man to prayer.Maybe we cannot
understand this thingThat makes these rebels
die;And yet all things love
freedom - and the SpringClear in the sky;I think I would not do
this deed againFor all that I hold by;Gaze down my rifle at
his breast - but thenA soldier I.They say that he was
kindly - different too,Apart from all the
rest;A lover of the poor; and
all shot through,His wounds ill drest,He came before us,
faced us like a man,He knew a deeper painThan blows or bullets -
ere the world began;Died he in vain?Ready - present; And he
just smiling - God!I felt my rifle shakeHis wounds were opened
out and round that chairWas one red lake;I swear his lips said
'Fire!' when all was stillBefore my rifle spatThat cursed lead - and
I was picked to killA man like that!

For What Died The Sons Of
Róisín: Luke Kelly

For what died the sons of Róisín, was
it fame?
For what died the sons of Róisín, was it fame?
For what flowed Irelands blood in rivers
That began when Brian chased the Dane
And did not cease nor has not ceased
With the brave sons of '16
For what died the sons of Róisín, was it fame?

For what died the sons of Róisín, was
it greed?
For what died the sons of Róisín, was it greed?
Was it greed that drove Wolfe Tone
To a paupers death in a cell of cold wet stone?
Will German, French or Dutch inscribe the epitaph of Emmet?
When we have sold enough of Ireland to be but strangers in it
For what died the sons of Róisín, was it greed?

To whom do we owe our allegiance
today?
To whom do we owe our allegiance today?
To those brave men who fought and died
That Róisín live again with pride?
Her sons at home to work and sing
Her youth to dance and make her valleys ring
Or the faceless men who for Mark and Dollar
Betray her to the highest bidder
To whom do we owe our allegiance today?

For what suffer our patriots today?
For what suffer our patriots today?
They have a language problem, so they say
How to write "No Trespass" must grieve their heart full sore
We got rid of one strange language
Now we are faced with many, many more,
For what suffer our patriots today?

The Foggy Dew: Charles
O’Neill

As down the glen one
Easter morn to acity fair rode IThere armed lines of
marching men insquadrons passed me byNo fife did hum nor
battle drum didsound its dread tattooBut the Angelus bell
o’er the Liffey swellrang out through the
foggy dew

Right proudly high over
Dublin townthey hung out the f lag
of war’Twas better to die
’neath an Irish skythan at Suvla or Sedd
El BahrAnd from the plains of
Royal Meathstrong men came
hurrying throughWhile Britannia’s Huns,
with theirlong-range guns sailed
in through thefoggy dew

’Twas Britannia bade
our Wild Geese gothat small nations
might be freeBut their lonely graves
are by Suvla’swaves or the shore of
the Great North SeaOh, had they died by
Pearse’s side orfought with Cathal
BrughaTheir names we will
keep where theFenians sleep ’neath
the shroud of thefoggy dew

But the bravest fell,
and the requiem bellrang mournfully and
clearFor those who died that
Eastertide inthe springing of the
yearAnd the world did gaze,
in deep amaze,at those fearless men,
but fewWho bore the fight that
freedom’s lightmight shine through the
foggy dew

Ah, back through the
glen I rode againand my heart with grief
was soreFor I parted then with
valiant menwhom I never shall see
moreBut to and fro in my
dreams I go andI’d kneel and pray for
you,For slavery f led, O
glorious dead,When you fell in the
foggy dew

Statement
by James Connolly to his Court Martial: May 9th, 1916:

“We went out to break the connection between this country and the
British Empire, and to establish an Irish Republic. We believed that the call
we then issued to the people of Ireland, was a nobler call, in a holier cause,
than any call issued to them during this war, having any connection with the
war. We succeeded in proving that Irishmen are ready to die endeavouring to win
for Ireland those national rights which the British Government has been asking
them to die to win for Belgium. As long as that remains the case, the cause of
Irish freedom is safe.

Believing that the British Government has no right in Ireland, never had
any right in Ireland, and never can have any right in Ireland, the presence, in
any one generation of Irishmen, of even a respectable minority, ready to die to
affirm that truth, makes that Government for ever a usurpation and a crime
against human progress”.

Friday, April 19, 2019

Wouldn’t it be better if the British government, the
Irish government and the DUP upheld the Brexit referendum vote in the North to
remain in the EU?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if there was no hard border?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if there was no border at all?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if the rights of every citizen on the island of Ireland were
upheld in law?

YesNo

Wouldn’t it be better if the British government
honoured its commitments under the Good Friday and subsequent Agreements?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if the Irish government honoured its commitments under the Good
Friday and subsequent Agreements?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if the British government refused to accept a Unionist veto over
the rights of citizens available elsewhere on these islands, except the North?

YesNo

Wouldn’t it be better if the Irish government
pro-actively and publicly campaigned for these rights and for the right of
Irish citizens living in the North and overseas to vote in Presidential
elections?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if the Irish government honoured the commitment in the Good Friday
Agreement negotiations to allow MPs elected in the North to attend and speak in
the Dáil -without voting rights?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if the British government accepted the right of citizens in the
North to identify as Irish or British or both and to honour that right in
legislation?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if the Irish government privately and publicly challenged the
British government on its refusal to accept the right of citizens in the North,
enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement, to identity as Irish?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if our future was based on tolerance and rights?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if there was no place for sectarian politics, segregation, gender
or racial discrimination?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if the island of Ireland was a leader in tackling climate change?

YesNo

Wouldn’t it be better if every citizen had the right to a home, to a job, to education at all levels and access to
health care at the point of delivery?

YesNo

Wouldn’t it be better if we lived in a society in which neither gender or race,
age or disability, sexual orientation or class, or creed or skin colour or
location was used to deny citizens their full rights and entitlements?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better to live in a society – a place of opportunity and equality in
which there is no denial of rights and where every single person, despite our
differences, is equal?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if there was full co-operation across our island on public
services, as well as agriculture, tourism, fishing, the environment, health,
education, policing and other services?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if health services in the North were available to people from the
South and vice versa?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if we lived in a society that upheld and defended workers’ rights,
ended the crisis in housing and homelessness across this island?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if we had an all-island economy that created more employment,
better paid jobs, ended the scourge of zero hour contracts, and treated workers
with respect?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if we had one policing and justice system for the island of
Ireland?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if these matters were agreed between the people who live on the
island of Ireland without interference from others?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better to live in a new, shared Ireland in which people of all religions
and none, whether unionist or nationalist or republican or none, have the same
entitlement to the full ownership of that new Ireland??

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if we started planning for this?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if the people of the North and the South on the opportunity to
agree on our future?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if, instead of engaging in negative carping and criticising as
divisive efforts to achieve a united, modern and shared Ireland, Fine Gael,
Fianna Fáil and others in the South agreed to establish a Forum which could
plan for and win a United Ireland?

YesNo

Wouldn’t
it be better if the Irish government supported the demand for a referendum on
Irish Unity as set out in the Good Friday Agreement?